+Show research progress to entire team original thread: http://forums.empiresmod.com/showthread.php?p=109807 Pros: - Would encourage teammates to wait for research to finish before building a tank when new tank parts or a new chassis is about to be researched. - Would let the entire team plan their strategies around what the comm is researching. - Would take pressure off the comm to constantly communicate what they're researching to the team themselves. - Would make it obvious more quickly when you have a newbie comm who isn't researching anything. Cons: - People could switch teams to see enemy research. - People might harass the comm for researching the 'wrong' thing. Alternatives: - Research could only be shown to teammates after they've been on the team for XYZ seconds, to limit exploits from team-switching. - There are a wide variety of ways to convey research to the players, including... - ...making it accessible to teammates in the radar building, which would give that building a purpose as a location. - ...making it accessible to anyone in the radar building, which would let people spy on your research progress - ...or show it only to teammates and enemy scouts, or only to enemies when the building is sabotaged. - ...putting it on the HUD so it is always visible. - ...putting it on the HUD when you are in any friendly building. - ...putting it on the full-screen map so you can call it up easily and intuitively. - ...have a separate 'research log' called up by its own key or some such thing. - Some methods could show only the current research, while others could show the whole completed-research tree. - Some of these options could also be combined (e.g. current research on fullscreen map, full log of all research bound to a key, or whatever.) - If using a seperate report screen or the like, team members could use that to choose what they want to request for research; the comm would see the numbers of people who want each research over the icon in their research menu. This could help newbie comms a bit.
+Three revive improvements When people are dead and there's a nearby engineer with revive, lock the dead person's view on that engineer so they know they can be revived. Also, when players have been revived, give them a small message, "You have been revived by engineer XYZ", so new players know what's going on. Finally, when you're an engineer, use icons or markers to show nearby dead people who you can revive. original thread: http://forums.empiresmod.com/showthread.php?p=110611 Pros: - Will make it easier for new players to understand the revive system. - Will encourage people to wait for revives when there is an engie nearby. - Will keep people from tapping out because they don't know a nearby engie has revive. Cons: - Locking the viewscreen could be annoying. - Icons could cause HUD clutter or block vision, and we may have too many of them already. - For the icons, squad members can already see the location of dead squadmates. - Many people won't wait for revives anyway - Engineers could get spammed with revive requests (but get that already, and this might not be a bad thing.) Alternatives: - Use icons to mark engineers who can revive for the dead people, instead of locking their view. - Have a message show up on dead people's screen saying 'If you wait, nearby engineer XYZ can revive you' or whatever. - The location and appearance of icons could be moved and fiddled with to try and avoid blocking vision by placing them at the border of the HUD, etc. - With the view-locking, there could be an option to unlock the view by holding CTRL or something. - A longer message when you die could explain the whole ticket system. - There was a tangent about temporary revive invulnerability / bonus HP.
+Voice-chat button that calls for the comm's attention while briefly signaling your location to them on their minimap original thread: http://forums.empiresmod.com/showthread.php?p=110625 Pros: - Would help when you're calling for a refinery or whatever and the comm can't find you. - Would make things easier on newbie comms, who sometimes need help from their players and can have trouble finding things / using coordinates. Cons: - Could be used to spam the comm, so a delay beween uses is probably needed. Alternatives: - Various alternatives for the voice, from "Command, I need your attention here" to the more specific "Need a refinery here..." - This could put a notice similar to building/vehicle/player under attack, so when the comm presses space the view automatically centers on the player who called for their attention. - The comm could be given the ability to click (or double- or triple-click) on a player's name in the chat window to jump to them.
+ Very slight research delay while the (comm's) radar is sabotaged. original thread: http://forums.empiresmod.com/showthread.php?p=110975 Pros: - Making the delay very slight would keep this from becoming unbalancing, while still making the radar an important target. - The radar's current reveal-troops effect when sabotaged is often not very useful, considering the building's overall importance. Cons: - Even a slight delay could prove too unbalancing. Alternatives: - There are various options for the exact amount of the delay. - How should this behave with multiple radars? It could only give a fraction of the delay based on the number sabotaged (encouraging multiple radars) or give it as a flat delay no matter how many you have (discouraging them.) - Research stealing was suggested again.
+ Silencing or removing the voiced arty call when spotting with the scout's binoculars. original thread: http://forums.empiresmod.com/showthread.php?p=112059 Pros: - There are many reasons to spot something with your binocs, and often you don't want arty on it. - Often your team won't even have or be using arty; scouts still have reasons to spot things. - Often you spot several things in a row, which spams your teammates. - If you do want arty on something you've spotted, you can send out the voice call manually via voice chat or a mic. - Even when you're not spotting several things in a row, teammates often complain so loudly about the contant voice spam from spotting that people stop using the scout's binoculars entirely. Cons: - None were brought up. Alternatives: - The automated voice-call for arty could be removed entirely, or made optional in one way or another. - Instead of calling for arty, the voice could identify the target, e.g. "heavy tank spotted". - In particular, even if other targets aren't voiced, there could be a vocal announcement when the comm vehicle is spotted ("comm vehicle spotted"), since that's often important.
+ Allowing people to respawn between allied spawn points without dying This is apparently a suggestion that comes up now and again, but nobody put it in the compilation list yet, so I thought I would. In this thread I suggested a 'transportation center' building that let you respawn at any of your spawn points without wasting a ticket, but many similar things have been suggested in the past: original thread: http://forums.empiresmod.com/showthread.php?p=110275Pros: - Lets people avoid wasting vehicles or tickets moving between places their team already controls; this is mainly important because servers can only support so many vehicles for technical reasons. - Judging by the thread (and the frequency with which it's suggested) many people seem to view having to use tickets to travel between spawns to be an annoyance. - If done through new buildings, allows an interesting way for a comm to set up 'infrastructure' for their team. - Would also help when you forget to choose your new spawn point and accidently spawn way back at your home base. - Could help stop jeep spamming, and would help make travelling (for people who don't want to waste their team's tickets) a little less boring - Would also (somewhat) discourage people from wasting their team's tickets just to move around the map. Cons: - Depending on how it's implemented, it could be unbalancing by making it too hard to take a fortified area (everyone near a spawn / transport building zooms back instantly). Alternatives: - It could require a seperate 'transportation center' building, which would have to be built seperately (and be outgoing only, so it'd have to be paired with a barracks for two-way transportation). - Or it could just be done automatically between any two barracks -- selecting a new spawn while in a friendly barracks would simply take you there. - It could require that you wait the typical spawn delay; this would limit the balance impact, since all it would be doing then (vs suiciding) is saving you a ticket. - There are differing fluff ways to describe what it is and how it works; people mentioned just having your old soldier 'fade out' and be replaced with a new one, or being moved behind the scenes by whatever abstract mechanism brings in new spawns, or underground tunnels, or teleporters, or whatever...
Reload Vehicle Weapons thread Pressing R reloads the current weapons in weapon slots you have selected. You lose any current missiles/bullets in your clip, as if you had fired them off to load a new clip. If players want to reload one weapon out of both of them, they can just create a weapon slot specifically for that weapon, then switch to that weapon slot when they only want to reload one of their guns Pros: Replaces current system where players waste heat and time getting rid of unwanted shells (e.g, they retreat their artilliary and have 2 shells left in clip) Removes annoyance when you enter battle with only half a clip Cons: Coding time Alternatives: press R and then fire1 or fire2 reloads the specific weapon (the fire1 or fire2 one) in the setup that they are using.
+When viewing mines and personal structures / walls, display the name under it original thread: Too lazy to look gimme an hour or somethingPros: - Handy. You instantly know whose turret or camera it is. - Perfect against griefers. Instead of pointing fingers without evidence, you now instantly know who is trying to mine the comm / walled up the barracks / blocked the way with turrets, etc. - I'm pretty sure you can recycle some of the code you used to display the different armor sides of vehicles. An example (first picture is to point out how there's already some code for this that could be modified) : Cons: - Clutters up HUD - Bitching about "WHY DID YOU BUILD A RADAR ON ESCORT" but that'll happen even without this so that's a moot point Alternatives: - The admin interrogates everyone in search of the griefers.
+ "Appoint squad leader" option for squad leaders to pass leadership to someone else. original thread: http://forums.empiresmod.com/showthread.php?t=4805 Pros: - Would make it easier to manage squads, and make who ends up as the leader less arbitrary. - In late game, would avoid confusion when trying to re-order the squad to make someone living the squad leader so they can use squad revive (but do we want to encourage this?) - Would let squads pick a leader who has the abilities they want at the moment (but this could also be a bad thing of it's too easy; see below) Cons: - Could make it too easy for a squad to cycle through to whatever leader's abilities they want at the moment, making them the 'Crysis Guy Squad' (but some people don't seem to think this is bad, to an extent) Alternatives: - If the 'crysis guy squad' is a problem, it could be changed so the squad leader only actually changes once the new leader respawns or is updated in an armory / barracks / flag. - Alternately, there could be a delay after changing squad leader before squad powers/auras become available; this would prevent constant changing to get all skills. - Any 'duration-based' squad powers could be ended whenever the squad leader changes to someone of a different class, to prevent people from stacking different classes' squad powers
+ Put squad power buttons on the squad menu (in addition to where they are now.) original thread: http://forums.empiresmod.com/showthread.php?t=4806 Pros: - Would make it easier for new players to find them by having a way to use them from a 'logical' place and by putting them where they're easily noticed. Cons: - None mentioned, although I suppose it would take up room on the squad menu. Alternatives: - None mentioned.
+ Put in default bindings for the squad power keys (and have them on the normal input setup menu). original thread: http://forums.empiresmod.com/showthread.php?t=4832 Pros: - Would make it easier to tell new players how to use them ("Hit key XYZ" instead of "Open voice menu, select squad, select power XYZ") - Most people bind them anyway, though several players (even experienced ones) don't seem to know that they can. Cons: - None mentioned, although I suppose it would take up two keys. Alternatives: - A default binding for emp_unstuck was also requested.
+ Show number of players on each team in the team-select menu. (implemented) original thread: http://forums.empiresmod.com/showthread.php?t=4926 Pros: - Would help avoid stacking. Yes, people can check with 'tab', but several players just have a favorite team and click it automatically... putting the numbers directly in front of them might discourage that. - It just, well, seems like a really basic feature. I actually had to go and check to make sure it wasn't already there before suggesting it, because it's so assumed... I suspect the lack of it is part of the reason Empires experiences so much stacking. Cons: - None mentioned. Alternatives: - One person suggested combining the squad/team/class menus when this is done. - Another person suggested listing all players on both teams in the team-select menu.
+ As comm, selecting multiple units should list their classes instead of just 'soldier'. original thread: http://forums.empiresmod.com/showthread.php?t=4976 Pros: - Would make it much easier for the comm to grab one engineer (or whatever other class they need) out of a group of people. - Would make it easier for the comm to assess what classes they have in a given area, so they'll know if (say) an attack group lacks an engineer or somesuch. Cons: - None mentioned. Alternatives: - Various other ways of showing it were mentioned (letter under avatar, whole name, etc).
+ Report who killed the comm at the end of a game. original thread: http://forums.empiresmod.com/showthread.php?t=4988 Pros: - Would be fun to know, and would help people recognize who the good ninjas are and so forth. Cons: - All the problems attendent to assigning kills currently also affect this (e.g. one person can happen to 'steal' the finishing blow, flipped CVs probably wouldn't be recognized as a kill to the person who flipped them, etc.) - Some people may enjoy being a 'stealth ninja' nobody knows about, keeping enemy comms from throwing up extra ninja-defenses when they see them on the other team. Alternatives: - It could report who did the most damage to the comm in the last few moments of the game (which would probably be whoever flipped it, if it was flipped.) - There are various different suggestions on how to display it (a special message, a typical kill message, etc.)
+ Give engineers armor sense for friendly tanks. original thread: http://forums.empiresmod.com/showthread.php?t=5005 Pros: - Would make it easier for engineers to know which tanks to repair, and which sides to repair when doing it. - Could encourage more teamwork by making it easier to be a general 'tank-repair engie'. Cons: - Tank image could occasionally be distracting. Alternatives: - It could be its own skill; or it could be part of the repair upgrade skill; or it could be an innate ability of all engineers.
+ Add a way to upgrade obsolete comm-placed turrets once newer models have been researched. original thread: http://forums.empiresmod.com/showthread.php?t=5029 Pros: - Would allow comms to plan long-term when placing turrets, thinking with upgrades in mind. - Would eliminate the annoyance of going around recycling and replacing all your turrets when you research better ones (which you can do now, but can be very clunky, especially if you want one in the exact same place.) Cons: - There is an element of strategy to deciding whether to place turrets or wait for newer ones to be researched (although, depending on how this is implemented, that element could be retained by making upgrading still non-trivial, just less annoying than the total replacement we're stuck with now.) - Allowing turrets to upgrade without engineers involved (see alternatives) could cause a turret to suddenly be able to hit a base it couldn't before; this could be good or bad. - Allowing engineers to upgrade obsolete turrets on a whim could result in griefers disabling all your turrets. Alternatives: - The comm could have to select obsolete turrets and click an 'upgrade' button - Using the upgrade button could cost a bit of money, or not. - Using the upgrade button could be done instantly or take a bit time (but be 'automatic', with no engineer required.) - Using the upgrade button could disable the turret until an engineer arrives to 'build' it (just like an engineer upgrading their own turrets.) - Engineers could use the 'upgrade' ability on comm-placed turrets to bring them up to the comm's highest turret level, which might (or might not) require the upgrade skill. - All turrets could upgrade automatically and instantly when the new level is available, or after a bit of time. - With most of the above options, upgrading from level 1 to 3 could be direct, or you could have to go through level 2 first (like with an engineer upgrading their own turret.)
+ 'Decline comm' checkbox. original thread: http://forums.empiresmod.com/showthread.php?t=5006 Pros: - Would avoid people ending up as comm when they don't want to, and reduce people who get voted as comm and immediately get out. - Would make it clearer who is willing to be comm and who isn't, giving some more structure to comm selection. - Would let people who know they're no good at comming avoid it, saving frustration for everyone involved. - When nobody wants to comm, or when nobody good wants to comm, this is at least made obvious via rejections, encouraging someone to change their mind and accept comm as it becomes clear. (but not everyone agrees this would work; see below) Cons: - Often, reluctant comms still end up comming when voted in. - Sometimes, good but reluctant comms end up accepting when they see nobody else good getting votes for comm; allowing these reluctant comms to avoid comming entirely via a checkbox could result in worse comms overall (but not everyone agrees that this would happen; see above.) - We could end up with only the newbies who don't know about the checkbox being available to comm. Alternatives: - The box could be checked by default (or it could even be a 'run for comm' box instead of a 'decline comm' box), avoiding the accidental newbie comm problem a bit (people at least need to know where the checkbox is to be comm, this way.) - The box's effect could either strictly let you avoid comm, preventing anyone from voting for you; or it could just be a 'suggestion' that people not vote for you, changing the color of your name or adding (declines comm) after it but still letting you get elected comm if everyone wants to vote for you.
+ Make it easier to identify comm vehicles on the minimap. original thread: http://forums.empiresmod.com/showthread.php?t=5020 Pros: - Would make it easier to tell what's going on, and would let teams avoid confusion. - Would be friendlier to new players, in general, who are probably going to have the most trouble distinguishing the comm icons on the minimap. Cons: - None were brought up. Alternatives: - There are various different icons or highlights that could be used, of course. Suggestions included new minimap icons, having it draw on top of other icons, putting a yellow outline around it, putting a box around it (possibly with 'comm' written), changing its color, adding a big crosshairs...
+ Allow the comm to 'claim' engineer turrets and walls by paying their build cost in res original thread: http://forums.empiresmod.com/showthread.php?t=5005 This would involve selecting the turret, clicking 'claim', and (this is important) paying the normal res cost for the item being claimed. The comm would also have to have enough room in their turret or wall limit to accept the item that they're claiming, and claiming a turret would require that you have that level of turret researched. Doing this would switch ownership of the item from the engineer to the comm. Pros: - Often, an engineer will build a wall or turret in a vital spot. This is good and should certainly be encouraged... but that means that the engineer can't change class for the rest of the map, and if they're disconnected the team can be in trouble (walls and turrets suddenly collapsing out of the blue.) This would let comms avoid that by claiming constructions at vital points as their own. - Additionally, if an engineer puts a wall or turret at a vital point, that means they can't place it elsewhere; this, paradoxically, can discourage engineers from building things at important locations. - Using this, engineers could essentially 'suggest' turret and wall locations for the comm, by constructing things that the comm later claims. - With the details noted at the top, this would avoid disrupting the gameplay balance; claiming an engineer wall or turret would require that you meet all the requirements to build it normally (including technology, so you can't get level 2s or 3s without researching them), would cost the same res (preventing you from claiming + recycling at a profit), wouldn't let you exceed your usual limits, and would take the same time to construct. It would just be more convenient for everyone involved. Cons: - One issue is that engineers can place turrets in a few places comms can't. This could be a good thing or a bad thing, but if it's an issue, it could just be set so the comm can only claim a turret if it's in a place they could build normally. Alternatives: - If this is done, engie-placed turrets and walls should show up differently on the comm's display or minimap, so they (1) know they can't rely on those being there forever, and (2) know they can claim them if they do want them there in the longer term. - Likewise, the engineer's minimap could show them if their turrets and walls have been claimed; or they could get a message letting them know. With turrets it would be obvious, but with walls it's not so obvious... engineers would need to know that that vital wall has been claimed so they can change class (although they could also just check their current build count with their tool.)
+ Changes to Grenade Launchers on Vehicles + original thread: http://forums.empiresmod.com/showthread.php?t=4881&highlight=Vehicular+Grenades Add more types of GLs, such as bio grenades, HE grenades, etc. Pros: -Would add more strategy to using GLs in combat. -Would add more variety in tank combat. Cons: -Would lead to a possibly more cluttered research tree -Would be difficult to balance Alternatives: -Attach new varieties of GLs to current to current technologies Add grenade launchers to jeeps. Pros: -Would allow jeeps a more powerful, yet still limited combat role. -Would add more variety in tank combat. Cons: -More powerful Jeeps may not be a good thing -Would be difficult to balance Alternatives: -Give GL slots to AFVs and/or LTs -Give control of GL to passengers Allow cooking of grenades from vehicles. Pros: -Would make GLs more useful in combating infantry. Cons: -May overpower GLs. -May be easier to damage self -Would be difficult to balance Alternatives: -Make cookable GLs researchable -See below Give GLs explode-on-contact functionality. Pros: -Would empower GLs in combat. -Would make GLs better at combating infantry. Cons: -GLs may become a poor man's cannon -Would be difficult to balance Alternatives: -Allow choice of weather or not to allow GLs to explode on contact, such as by setting primary fire to contact and secondary to timer. -Make contact/timer GLs researchable Limit GLs to infantry combat by reducing damage to vehicles and buildings (1/10). Pros: -Would give GLs a more well defined role, and something to excel at that no other weapon could do as well (clear infantry from cover). Cons: -Would prevent GLs from destroying turrets, bases, and tanks (bad :confused: ) -Would be difficult to balance Alternatives: -Give only 1/2 or 1/4 damage to tanks or buildings. -Make non-anti-infantry or anti-infantry GLs researchable. Add range to GLs. Pros: -Would add more strategy to using GLs in combat. -Would add more variety in tank combat. -Would make infantry getting out of APCs to throw longer ranged grenades pointless Cons: -Would be difficult to balance Alternatives: -Make ERGLs (Extended Range Grenade Launchers) researchable.
